Group therapy was originally conceived by a physician who attempted to instruct groups of individuals regarding the care of tuberculosis. This physician, dr.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life J. H. Pratt, noticed that individuals in groups began to support one another, and he actually began referring to his educational sessions as group psychotherapy.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life group psychotherapy became increasingly popular after world war II when groups of combat veterans were treated together.

As mentioned above, group therapy consists of a number of different conditions where one or more therapists treats at least two individuals in the same session.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life typically, the number of therapists running group sessions is one or two; however, some special cases may require more therapists or assistants to run particular types of groups.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life the size of the group being treated will vary, depending on the type of therapy being delivered and on several other factors. For example, most often, marital therapy (a type of group therapy where spouses are being treated) typically consist of only two clients.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life group therapy for substance use disorders may consist of 10 or more individuals, depending on the therapist. In general, research indicates that the most effective groups typically have a maximum number of 6-12 clients; however, depending on the nature of the group, there may be more than 20 individuals.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life

Group therapy offers some specific advantages that make it attractive for both the therapist and the clients being treated. According to scholarly sources, such as the handbook of group counseling and psychotherapy , these are benefits of individuals working together in groups and do not necessarily indicate that group therapy is superior in any way to individual therapy (see below).Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life

• the therapeutic alliance refers to the bond between the therapist and the client that allows them to address the client’s issues effectively.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life this is an extremely important factor in positive therapeutic outcomes. According to dr. Yalom, the therapeutic alliance occurring in group therapy is broader than the alliance that occurs in individual therapy.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life

• certain individuals are not appropriate for group therapy. Often, individuals who are extremely manipulative, aggressive, shy, impulsive, or suffering from active psychosis are not appropriate for groups.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life in addition, some individuals are not appropriate for certain types of groups. For instance, a blue-collar worker may feel out of place in a group full of physicians and college professors.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life

In general, the majority of the research suggests that individual therapy and group therapy are effective for treating nearly every type of problem, psychological disorder, or issue that is addressed within a therapeutic or counseling environment.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life some individuals may be more suited to working in groups based on the above discussion of the strengths of group therapy, whereas others may be more suited to working in individual situations.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life in addition, a number of different therapeutic paradigms, such as dialectical behavior therapy, use both group and individual therapy, and individuals benefit from both.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life

The choice to become involved in group or individual therapy will depend on a number of different factors, including affordability, one’s comfort level with discussing problems in front of other individuals, and the type of intervention being used.Examples of cognitive learning in everyday life neither form of therapy is “better” than the other, but both represent different approaches to reaching the same goal.